Is NAFTA making you pay more at the pump?
I'm still trying to figure out why NAFTA-Gate is such a big deal. For those not up to date on the story, allow me to simplify.
Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton have been campaigning to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate for what seems like a full-calendar year. The weird language of the pundits and political commentators turns the entire process into “a battle,” or “a contest,” based more on personality and video clips than substance. A nationally televised debate isn't worth watching unless Obama and Clinton are hacking on one another, trying to “score points.”
One of the staples in both Obama and Clinton's economic platforms lately has been the suggestion that both would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, the trade deal which ties the US, Mexico and Canada together. Neither Clinton nor Obama started the campaign by criticizing NAFTA (that would be Denis Kucinich, who was usually laughed off the stage). But as the economy of the States slows, as their dollar loses strength, the price of everything goes up, especially oil and gasoline, without which their economy wouldn't exist (or ours either, for that matter).
The political class in the US knows for a fact that the country is becoming segmented into very rich elites and the rest of the population. The States' economy isn't what it once was, and someone has to be blamed. Can't be the system at fault, get me?
So, when Obama and Clinton were campaigning in Ohio last week they were both strongly suggesting NAFTA was to blame for the economic depression in the state, and that they were going to stop the insanity. Imagine, a trade deal that doesn't benefit hard working American people! So when the story came out in the media that an Obama aide had told officials from Canada that he wasn't serious about reworking NAFTA, that his words were just campaign posturing... well, Clinton jumped on this at the last second, and a case could be made that the leak cost Obama some votes. Political parties back in Canada, the NDP's Jack Layon leading the charge, then jumped on the Conservatives, blaming them for screwing with the US electoral process. The story of where “the leak” came from is now impossible to determine, since most politicians and their handlers can develop poor memories very quickly, and the spin-doctors were, and are, working overtime.
But, check this out: during November 2007 Canada exported 2.360 million barrels of oil to the States, per day. During the same period, Mexico exported 1.3 million barrels per day. That almost 3.5 million barrels per day directly to the US market from the NAFTA partners. I'm not sure if America exports anything of equal strategic value to Canada, but if you want to make a case write to me care of The ‘Bang.
Written directly into the NAFTA is a provision that stipulates Canada cannot sell oil to the US at anything other than market value. So when oil is $105 US per barrel, that's what the oil companies get paid when they sell a Canadian resource across the border. Simple math: 31 days in November times 2.3 million per day at $100 per barrel. Adds up quick. But, imagine if Canada taxed each barrel that left the country, say $2 per barrel. That adds up fast, too. And considering oil is a finite resource... Well, that's the kind of talk that Canadian and American politicians don't enjoy.
Why didn't our politicians, or journalists, try to find out what Obama and Clinton meant by reworking NAFTA before the last minute? NAFTA is a very important trade agreement, after all, dealing with strategic resources like oil and water, involving astronomical amounts of money. After so many months of debates and press conferences and interviews, why was this story a surprise? NAFTA-gate doesn't give anyone much reason to place their trust in the media or politicians, on either side of the border.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton have been campaigning to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate for what seems like a full-calendar year. The weird language of the pundits and political commentators turns the entire process into “a battle,” or “a contest,” based more on personality and video clips than substance. A nationally televised debate isn't worth watching unless Obama and Clinton are hacking on one another, trying to “score points.”
One of the staples in both Obama and Clinton's economic platforms lately has been the suggestion that both would renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, the trade deal which ties the US, Mexico and Canada together. Neither Clinton nor Obama started the campaign by criticizing NAFTA (that would be Denis Kucinich, who was usually laughed off the stage). But as the economy of the States slows, as their dollar loses strength, the price of everything goes up, especially oil and gasoline, without which their economy wouldn't exist (or ours either, for that matter).
The political class in the US knows for a fact that the country is becoming segmented into very rich elites and the rest of the population. The States' economy isn't what it once was, and someone has to be blamed. Can't be the system at fault, get me?
So, when Obama and Clinton were campaigning in Ohio last week they were both strongly suggesting NAFTA was to blame for the economic depression in the state, and that they were going to stop the insanity. Imagine, a trade deal that doesn't benefit hard working American people! So when the story came out in the media that an Obama aide had told officials from Canada that he wasn't serious about reworking NAFTA, that his words were just campaign posturing... well, Clinton jumped on this at the last second, and a case could be made that the leak cost Obama some votes. Political parties back in Canada, the NDP's Jack Layon leading the charge, then jumped on the Conservatives, blaming them for screwing with the US electoral process. The story of where “the leak” came from is now impossible to determine, since most politicians and their handlers can develop poor memories very quickly, and the spin-doctors were, and are, working overtime.
But, check this out: during November 2007 Canada exported 2.360 million barrels of oil to the States, per day. During the same period, Mexico exported 1.3 million barrels per day. That almost 3.5 million barrels per day directly to the US market from the NAFTA partners. I'm not sure if America exports anything of equal strategic value to Canada, but if you want to make a case write to me care of The ‘Bang.
Written directly into the NAFTA is a provision that stipulates Canada cannot sell oil to the US at anything other than market value. So when oil is $105 US per barrel, that's what the oil companies get paid when they sell a Canadian resource across the border. Simple math: 31 days in November times 2.3 million per day at $100 per barrel. Adds up quick. But, imagine if Canada taxed each barrel that left the country, say $2 per barrel. That adds up fast, too. And considering oil is a finite resource... Well, that's the kind of talk that Canadian and American politicians don't enjoy.
Why didn't our politicians, or journalists, try to find out what Obama and Clinton meant by reworking NAFTA before the last minute? NAFTA is a very important trade agreement, after all, dealing with strategic resources like oil and water, involving astronomical amounts of money. After so many months of debates and press conferences and interviews, why was this story a surprise? NAFTA-gate doesn't give anyone much reason to place their trust in the media or politicians, on either side of the border.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
